Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: TheNinja
Fuck all these people attacking her. She has the right to answer a question truthfully and give her opinion. The stupid liberals only want free speech as long as it's their point of view.
If you speak out for gay marriage, you are considered compassionate, modern, forward thinking, etc.
If you speak out against gay marriage, you are considered a closed minded hick or a religious fanatic.
It's pathetic. Everyone can have their own opinion.
yup.
they are trying to make it like race, when it clearly is nothing like that. being wired to bum dudes is not the same as skin color. it is more akin to a benign disorder compared to say being a paedophile. no religion necessary to reach that conclusion. comparing the benign disorder/miswiring of homosexuality to being black for instance is about as offensive as it gets.
well if you want to get genetic with it, then your same logic would equate white skin as a mutation (miswiring or disorder in your world), as black skin is clearly the normal homo sapien-evolved pigment.
Since there is as much evidence for a natural origin for homosexuality, i don't see how you can differentiate the two cases. There really is no distinguishing at the genomic level.
well no because skin color is superficial as a trait. miswiring mentally is something of a different order all together. there is no functional difference in furthering the species when it comes to skin color. which is in rather stark contrast to the problem of homosexuality which would doom any species if it were more wide spread or infectious. people would get by just fine if they all changed to one color. not so much if everyone started to bang the wrong gender. at the best you can claim that homosexuality persists because it is a side effect of some other trait that was selected for, and was deemed worth the waste/cost. as for natural. i'm sure some pedophiles are wired that way naturally if you know what i mean. it is natural for nature to be some what wasteful that way. tolerance of such individuals is fine. but i think the claim that they are directly comparable to the concept of race is misguided. let alone the jump to such people being entitled to marriage.
do you know the difference between genotype and phenotype?
the fact that you bring pedophiles into the discussion is hilarious. plenty of studies, (linked in yet another hashed version of this same tired argument) have shown that heterosexual men are far more likely to engage in pedophilia than a homosexual male.
It's data. it's evidence. it's yet another crumbling of that tired and archaic stereotype that your agenda continues to push.
you are trying to argue science based on assumptions. not only is that wrong, your assumptions are completely misguided and in no way reflect actual data. I mean, seriously, wtf do you mean by "there is no functional difference to furthering the species when it comes to skin color." ???
you might want to pull yourself out of this line of argument before you make a greater fool of yourself.
ask yourself why skin pigmentation differences evolved. The actual answer is environmental adaptation--as humans migrated to different climates, different pigments were selected as better functional adaptations to the various environments due to sun exposure, heat and moisture adaptation. There is no way to understand the differences in pigmentation without accepting it as a functional necessity for humans to survive in their particular environment. Along these lines are ave height, body weight percentages, nose shapes, types of ear wax, etc.....All functional adaptations directly related to the diverse climate pressures that migrating humans evolved to survive in.
Facebook
Twitter